It’s a question we hear asked more and more as pay-for-play scandals emerge with greater frequency: should college athletes get paid? The short answer is “No.” But this is a question that deserves more than a one-word response. When it comes to money and college athletics, it’s complicated.

Naturally, college athletics, like any big-money endeavor, is about supply and demand. There are very few people with the pocket presence of Cam Newton or the to-the-hoop acrobatics of Derrick Rose. They are in short supply and great demand. That’s why pro salaries are so high.

The upcoming NFL draft is pure money, pure supply and demand. There’s no talk of education. There’s no talk of school spirit. It’s a contract. And we see that both sides — owners and players — will claw at each other for the best deal. It’s billionaires versus millionaires. And they’re fighting today, with the threat of a lockout looming.

But college is totally different. And from a spectator’s standpoint, thank goodness. Who wants to see football players go on strike before a showdown in Jacksonville?

But the same supply and demand principle remains in college football just as in the pros.

Everybody wants the stud. And there’s intense competition to get him. As much as we want to believe in the sanctity of the college game, the money corrupts it. We see this over and over again, the stories of the new wheels for the running back, the cash handshakes, the new assistant coaching job for dad, the new home for grandma.

Of course, the biggest corruption scandal this past year involved Auburn. But forget, for a moment, the talk of a payoff, which surrounded Cam Newton this year. And think of this question: what was Newton’s signature worth for Auburn? Think of the national championship, the merchandise, the contributions from elated boosters, the ticket sales, the television time, the new recruits who want to be a part of a championship program, the memories for fans who replied to their archrival’s 2009 success with their own national title. Oh, the blogs.

Of course, Newton’s dad sought $180,000 for his son’s signature. That’s been acknowledged by the NCAA, which let the younger Newton off the hook because there was no proof that Dad told his son about the pay scheme. Now, that’s a mighty close brush with real catastrophe for Auburn. Any recorded phone call putting Newton in the room with his dad and the son’s eligibility — at any school — would have been shot, and so would Auburn’s national title.

Still, think of the net effect for the game. You think rich boosters at other schools will weigh the risk-reward of such payoffs and come away too scared to put cash in an unmarked bag or briefcase? In pure dollars and cents, a $180,000 payoff would be a heck of a deal for a program-changing stud. Such a player, if he pans out, is worth many millions in revenue for a school.

Meanwhile, the NCAA these days seems terribly reluctant to address the dirt under its nose. The institution sticks to the same old point, that the currency in college isn’t money, it’s the scholarship.

And that’s largely true. There’s probably never a cash handshake for a vast majority of athletes. But it’s a lie to say the most coveted college athletes in the true revenue-generating sports — football and men’s basketball — are lured to campus for an education. Some of these guys will take advantage of the currency (the scholarship) they’re offered. They’ll prove successful outside of sports. There are many positive stories. But there are also the guys who were poor students in high school, who don’t have a strong education background, who really don’t have any chance to succeed in a true college environment. They’re simply signed for their lockdown coverage skills in front of 90,000 on a Saturday, their ability to drain a three-pointer in the clutch.

Some of these guys don’t have much interest in the currency (the scholarship) given to them outside of remaining eligible to play the sport they love. They will help earn the school millions in revenue but won’t receive any of it. Therefore, many will view the system as tilted against them. And you can count on a certain percentage of these guys to seek money elsewhere, to seek the payoff from boosters, to go where there’s the promise of under-the-table pay.

So, what do you do?

It wouldn’t be outlandish to include a stipend, something comparable to a minimum wage job, as part of a scholarship since athletes often don’t have the time to work outside of school as most students can.

But I’m not totally sold on that either. Because it’s hard to believe that introducing money to college athletes would clean up a corrupt environment. How would pay be applied? Would everyone make the same wage? Would all athletes — from swimmers to the equestrian team — make the same money as the five-star running back? Would a small stipend do anything to dissuade a player from taking a payoff? That’s doubtful.

Still, I sympathize with the athlete who looks up from the field to the “wine and cheese” crowd in the skyboxes and wonders when his skybox time is going to come.

Did you know that athletes give away the right to their image for the rest of their lives when they sign a scholarship? I doubt many athletes know or care about this on signing day. But merchandisers and video game-makers make billions using the images of former college players without their permission. Former UCLA basketball star Ed O’Bannon and other former college players have filed a class action anti-trust lawsuit against the NCAA, saying they are entitled to payments for the use of their own image. It makes sense: why should video gamemakers and merchandisers make big bucks off a player’s name, but not the player himself — at least after he’s out of school?

The courts recently ruled that old pro football players should be paid for their likeness in video games. So, will the same hold true for college athletes?

If so, what does this mean for college amateurism, for the sale of jerseys and other merchandise?

No easy answers.

But one thing is clear: the NCAA needs to shape up and work harder to sweep the dirt out of the game. It’s getting hard to watch.

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:

Phone*

What is four plus four?

Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.